by Michael

The kind of email corporations get

[The show report is coming along – we are at about halfway through the 3rd day. Check it out and let us know what you think so far, if you get a chance: CES 2008 Show Report ]

We get emails like this all the time.

“Hello,

I searching through search engine and found your website that sell some
products that i need. So I decide to purchase that product from you.
Before i place some order, i have several question below:
1. Your company able sent the goods to outside your country?
2. Shipment by UPS or FedEx?
3. Are you accepting Visa and Mastercard as payment?
4. How can i get some discount for this purchase?

Please let me know your further information for my inquiry soon.

Best Regards,
Joseph”

Translated this means:

“Hello,”

Hi,

“I searching through search engine and found your website that sell some
products that i need. So I decide to purchase that product from you.”

The software I downloaded that searches for small businesses on the web found your site and then sent this badly written email I copied and modified a little in case you already are wary of the amazingly similar original.

“Before i place some order, i have several question below:”

Before I actually spend any time trying to steal from you, I need you to indicate just how stupid you are.

“1. Your company able sent the goods to outside your country?”

Do you send products to places where you can be easily ripped off because of lack of enforcement of certain credit card laws?

“2. Shipment by UPS or FedEx?”

I will mention a few reputable companies to make me look reputable.

“3. Are you accepting Visa and Mastercard as payment?”

Are you extraordinarily ignorant of credit card scams?

“4. How can i get some discount for this purchase?”

A real customer would ask for a discount, so I am asking for a discount so I look like a real customer [this is actually more advanced than 90% of all of these emails]

“Please let me know your further information for my inquiry soon.”

Please respond if you are an easy mark. I want more money now.

“Best Regards,
Joseph”

Please send me your free products,
Automated Ripoffs Incorporated

in High-end Audio HiFi and Stereo / Humor 0 comments
 by Michael

What I mean by 'Mid-Fi'

I received an email today [I think it was today] feedback on the CES 2008 Show report, such as it is at this point. I am posting it here, anonymously, because I think many people may also be curious but not want to email us [me] such a, uh, potentially inflammatory question.

“Hi, it would be interesting to hear more about the definitions you are using to describe the sound in the report section. VTL/Wilson a big mid-fi stereo!!!???

Different hearing and different opinions as to what live music sounds like?

“VTL’s room is always an oasis at shows, playing music at levels that actually match rather than trying to impress the listener with mere volume, the system meticulously set up. The same was true at CES 2008, a pair of Wilson WATT/Puppy 8s being driven by the new MB450 Series II tubed monoblocks”

Your input would be highly appreciated.”

——————————————————-

I use “Mid-Fi” as an abbreviation for a system that has so many problems I grow weary of describing them.

[BTW, The quote is by Robert Deutsch over on the Stereophile blog. Nice guy, doing his job. If you read what he said, he is 100% correct: the room was not played too loud, and they did pay attention to setup – at least with respect to choosing nice ancillary components.]

In this case, the notes were attenuated more quickly [dampened] than what I consider high-end [and some died out more quickly than others], the dynamics was more uneven top to bottom than what one might expect from the high-end [the upper-mids had more midi-dynamics than the rest of the frequencies, which had little to none], there was no micro-dynamics to speak of, harmonic color was almost non-existent, separation was problematic and uneven across the dynamic and frequency band more so than is standard… and I didn’t listen to check the imaging, soundstaging, air, emotion, etc.

In my mind, there is a line that separates high-fi and mid-fi – the minimum system that is high-fi is prototypically the Acoustic Zen Adagio loudspeaker being driven by a decent amp [Red Dragon, Kharma MP150, both are digital amps – approximately a $10K system plus source]. But systems with the Von Schweikert VR4, even sometimes systems built around the EPOS speakers, often, but not always, qualify in my opinion as high-end. Some of Odyssey Audio systems as well might qualify – which makes them so intriguing to me as they total around $5K.

What these systems all have is balance – they do a lot of high-end audio-like things ‘good enough’, and these things are things that go into making a system enjoyable for the long term. Big Mid-fi systems have a wide frequency range and they go loud. That’s about it.

And VTL + Wilson systems sound like this at every show. So do BAT + Wilson systems. I have no doubt that individual audiophiles can make similar systems work. At least inasmuch as they say they are happy and that they sometimes mention that they also think the show systems suck, and that their systems sound nothing like them.

anyway, thanks so much for your question – I am sure there are a lot of people who wondered the same thing.

Take care,
Mike.

in CES 2008 / High-end Audio HiFi and Stereo / Show Reports 0 comments
 by Michael

Jeff Day's CES 2008 Show Report at 6moons

[We are still at the Alexis Park, scheduled to leave in a few hours, missing, hopefully, some nasty weather that was imposing itself on travelers yesterday.]

Jeff Day’s show report is interesting, and disturbing in a couple of ways.

First, it looks like I missed a couple of rooms [in particular Sander’s room with his new InnerSound-ish speakers and his immediate neighbors. Damn. Twice in that area of the St. Tropez I had to stop photographing because the 3 2GB memory cards I use were all filled up. Next year… more cards. Or bigger cards.]

Second, there is this quote:

“The Soundlabs are even bigger than the Klangfilm Bionars, which is amazing in itself. The Soundlabs are so big in fact that I couldn’t get far enough away to get the two front channel speakers into the lens of my iPhone. The rear channels were equally astonishing. If you have a really big wallet and a really small thingy, these babies will compensate for both. Guaranteed. For those of us with a modest wallet and a big thingy, look elsewhere.”

Ignoring the judging of speakers on the focal length of the iPhone camera with respect to the size of the exhibition room [hey, we’ve all seen people evaluate the performance of a product based on all manner of weird stuff. Whatever…], and people’s fascination about the length of this particular appendage on other people [no, no, large penises are a fine thing] – the idea of critiquing the character of the owners of a product, instead of the product itself, besides being content-free and distracting from the matter at hand e.g. the sound of a room at a show, is, in my opinion, a prime example of the decline of the professionalism of the professional journalists not only in our industry but across the board.

Although this is a new low, there have been other instances where very popular reviewers have made comments that are overly bold, aggressive, and incorrect or unsubstantiated. For example: “full range speaker X does not go much below 40Hz”, or “CD player Y is inferior to its competition vis-a-vis its red book performance”. Tell us how you measured the output of the speaker [but, oh, the magazine that eschews measurements]. Tell us how you moved the speaker around to try and get it out of the room nodes. With what speakers are you comparing the low-end to with respect to the energy expected from a speaker in this room. etc. etc. And similarly, what players are you referring to with better red book? In what WAY are they better?

Anyway, I’m not sure we are going to start naming names here but we do try to avoid sweeping stupidities here at Audio Federation, and do try to talk about the SOUND of things, and WHY certain things are superior or inferior examples of various qualities desirable from the point of view of a system designed for music reproduction.

If we ever succumb to the prevailing malaise with respect to replacing straight talk with sensationalistic flame bait, like saying something like… oh… that 99% of reviewers are clueless or whores [thanks F.C. :-)] when the number is really closer to 90%, please PLEASE let us know.

in CES 2008 / High-end Audio HiFi and Stereo / Show Reports / Sounding Off 0 comments